PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Standard of RT in USA
View Single Post
Old 26th Aug 2013, 10:37
  #470 (permalink)  
HDRW
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: South East England
Age: 70
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Uplinker
Language moves with the times, and some slang might arguably be better than current ICAO; for example; 'point' instead of 'dey-ci-mal' - the fewer the number of syllables, the better I reckon.
NO! It's not a race - they didn't choose 'decimal' on a whim - everthing has a reason, and one of those is to reduce the possibility of mis-hearing. Apart from the fact that 'point' in French is used as 'comma' is in numbers in English (to separate every three digits) it's not a distinctive enough word to come through clearly on a noisy channel or when audio is low - it can be confused with 'four' in those cases (yes, really!).
Other pronunciations are also for disambiguation: FIFE and NINER separate what can otherwise sound similar (NINER is two syllables but is 'better' than NINE). TREE is because some languages don't have a TH sound so would find it hard to pronounce the word THREE. (For those who don't understand how a sound can be missing from a language, consider the 'CH' sound in Scottish - we english pronounce the name Murdoch as 'murdok' whereas the scots finish it with a long soft sound which we just don't have. The Welsh pronunciation of 'LL' is also absent outside the Land Of My Fathers).
Language and slang evolve with usage, but this isn't a language, it's a communications standard which evolves by discussion and agreement, not by ignoring it.
Originally Posted by Uplinker
But the thing is; all of the ICAO compliant organisations need to agree such terms so that all pilots and ATC {who speak all sorts of different languages, not necessarily English} only use approved phrases, and all know what is meant by such terms. Slang that is not ambiguous for one person might be incomprehensible to another - resulting in at best extra read-backs, confusion and too much time taken up on busy frequencies, or at worst a flight safety incident.
Yes Yes Yes! That's it exactly - it's an International agreement - it's not the Brits trying to force our ideas on the rest, it's been discussed and decided by all the countries involved in ICAO, and we aren't saying 'you should do it our way' but 'you should do it the way you (and everyone else) agreed to'.
Originally Posted by Uplinker
So get them approved by ICAO and I'm sure we will all be happy to use them (and know what they mean).

Simples
Indeed, that's what has already happened, the current set of standards exists, and until it's changed it should be used. Making it up as you go on because you think you know better is just arrogant and dangerous. Speed of delivery isn't the most important factor - accurate, unambiguous communication is.
HDRW is offline